Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/04/2003 01:10 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 177 - CONCEALED HANDGUNS Number 0391 CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the next order of business would be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 177, "An Act relating to concealed handguns." [Before the committee was CSSSHB 177(STA).] Number 0427 BRIAN JUDY, Alaska State Liaison, Institute for Legislative Action, National Rifle Association of America (NRA), urged the committee's support of [CSSSHB 177(STA)]. On the surface, this legislation appears to make a substantive change to Alaska's law; however, he countered, it simply makes a technical change that really has no substantive impact. Mr. Judy specified that the intent of this legislation is to open up the recognition of Alaska's concealed firearm permits by other states. This legislation requires that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) enter into reciprocity agreements, which he understood the new administration to be working on already. He noted that SSHB 177 was amended in the House State Affairs Standing Committee in order to clarify that Alaska only has to reciprocate with those states with which Alaska can legally do so. This legislation also repeals language that was added to last year's legislation, SB 242. MR. JUDY relayed that during the debate on SB 242, there was concern that certain Alaskans who were denied permits or had revoked permits might be able to have permits issued in other states and return to Alaska and carry [a concealed weapon]. Although supporters of SB 242 felt the aforementioned was unlikely, [the NRA] didn't feel that the amendment would detract from the intent of SB 242. However, the amendment has provided a barrier to the recognition of Alaska permits. He noted that he provided the committee with a list of the states that issue permits to nonresidents, in order to ease concerns [that those who were denied permits or had revoked permits might be able to have permits issued in other states and return to Alaska and carry a concealed weapon]. He pointed out that those states issuing permits to nonresidents have issuance criteria essentially identical to Alaska's criteria. Therefore, he said it would be extraordinarily unlikely that an Alaskan [who was denied or had a revoked permit] would be able to obtain a permit in another state. MR. JUDY reiterated that this legislation will have no substantive impact on the State of Alaska, although it will open the door for the recognition of Alaska permits by other states. He again urged the committee's support of [CSSSHB 177(STA)]. Number 0648 REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that he wanted to ensure that this legislation doesn't allow the state to recognize the right to carry a concealed weapon from someone from a state with a lower standard than Alaska. He asked if the legislation does that. MR. JUDY said that this legislation makes no change to that. Under existing law, Alaska already recognizes permits from all other states. This legislation merely facilitates the recognition of Alaska permits by other states. REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if this legislation lowers Alaska's standards for issuing a permit to Alaskans or issuing a permit to a person from another state. MR. JUDY replied no, and pointed out that under Alaska law, a nonresident can't apply for an Alaskan permit. Number 0719 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to line 15 of CSSSHB 177(STA) and commented, "That was not what we changed in the State Affairs Committee." He relayed his understanding that the permittees would be able to carry concealed handguns in both states. However, the way the language is currently written, it only allows Alaskans to enter into other states and carry a [concealed] weapon; the legislation doesn't seem to complete the reciprocity so that those validly permitted in other states can carry [a concealed weapon] in Alaska. Therefore, he suggested changing the language [on line 15] from "in those other states" to "both states". However, he said he wasn't sure that was necessary. MR. JUDY agreed that the language change isn't necessary because any Alaskan with an Alaska permit can carry in Alaska and because Alaska law recognizes permit holders from other states. Therefore, the reason to ensure that these reciprocity agreements are entered into by the DPS is because some states require such agreements in order to recognize other states' permits. This legislation is solely to benefit Alaska citizens, he opined, and will ensure that Alaskan citizens will be able to carry [concealed weapons] in as many other states as possible. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that he had asked for confirmation that there is really a problem, and that he was given a letter from Louis Beaty, Manager, Crime Records Service Legal Staff, Texas Department of Public Safety, to Barbara Bitney dated April 4, 2003. Number 0878 REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that [CSSSHB 177(STA) deals with an amendment last year that was intended to prevent Alaska from recognizing the right of people from other states to carry a concealed weapon if that individual had previously had their concealed weapon permit revoked in the past. He asked, "By amending this law, are we not making it alright for people from other states who have standards for carrying a concealed weapons that are lower than our standards to then carry them within this state?" MR. JUDY replied no, and specified that [CSSSHB 177(STA)] will have no impact on that. Under existing law, regardless of other states' standards, their permits are recognized in Alaska. Looking across the nation, over 40 states issue concealed weapon permits. Although every law varies, the issuance criteria is fairly comparable. Mr. Judy emphasized that regardless of the issuance criteria, the empirical evidence from every state is the same: concealed weapon permit holders rarely cause any problem. Number 1014 REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SSHB 177, echoed Mr. Judy's testimony that this legislation is a technical amendment rather than a substantive change. As the Louis Beaty letter describes, Representative Stoltze remarked, this legislation attempts to remove a technical barrier in order to allow greater reciprocity. He highlighted Section 2, which specifies that the [DPS] will continue to move forward in overcoming these technical barriers and create reciprocity with other states in order to guarantee the rights of Alaskan citizens. Number 1134 NOEL NAPOLILLI, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC); Alaska Second Amendment Coalition, simply noted the AOC's full support of [CSSSHB 177(STA)]. REPRESENTATIVE GARA relayed his understanding that this legislation would eliminate a provision of law that says a concealed handgun permit couldn't be obtained in this state if the individual had previously had a handgun permit revoked in [another state]. By changing the law, it seems to suggest that someone from out of state would be allowed to carry a concealed handgun even if the individual had a concealed handgun permit revoked or suspended. Why is this a good idea, he asked. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he didn't believe that the aforementioned provision actually protected the state, but instead simply illustrates the danger of making amendments on the [House] floor. After acknowledging that it is awkward to remove something from existing law, he opined that the language shouldn't have been included in the first place. REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if eliminating the provision that prohibits the issuance of a permit to someone who had their permit revoked would appear to say that it's acceptable to issue a permit to an individual who previously had a concealed weapons permit revoked. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that eliminating this provision recognizes that there are enough protections in Alaska's existing concealed carry law to prevent such a situation. He posed a situation in which an individual was denied a permit on the basis of age, because the individual was too young. He suggested that Texas is probably more interested in the reasons individuals are denied or revoked rather than just the mere fact of the denial or revocation. Number 1364 CHAIR McGUIRE asked if Representative Stoltze had spoken with the Texas Department of Public Safety in order to determine whether this legislation would allow reciprocity between Alaska and Texas. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE suggested that the letter from Louis Beaty specifies that [current law] is the major obstacle [in reciprocity]. He also noted that he has had many conversations with different levels of bureaucracy and staff of the Texas Legislature and gathered the same response. He said he suspected that [Texas] is probably reluctant to just come right out and say that if Alaska enacts this, then Texas will automatically approve reciprocity. CHAIR McGUIRE mentioned Representative Croft's proposal to eliminate permits altogether and inquired as to why not pursue that over [CSSSHB 177(STA)]. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE explained that Representative Croft's proposal doesn't actually eliminate the permits altogether. Representative Croft's proposal copies a statute from Vermont. Representative Stoltze said that Representative Croft's legislation retains the permit in recognition of the need to have the ability for reciprocity so that Alaskan citizens could carry their permit in other states. It's not harmful to have the permit process, he said. Number 1486 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM opined that if someone doesn't qualify for a handgun permit in Alaska, they probably wouldn't qualify elsewhere because Alaska has one of the strictest qualification standards in the country. REPRESENTATIVE GARA, in response to Representative Holm's statement, opined that someone would be able to qualify elsewhere if that location had lesser standards than the State of Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM argued that this legislation attempts to allow reciprocity. Noting that there was a concern that there would be individuals entering Alaska from states with lesser qualifying standards, he opined that such can't happen. REPRESENTATIVE GARA said if Alaska has the strictest standards, then other states have less strict standards, and therefore doesn't that mean that Alaska will be admitting people who received permits under lesser standards. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM simply remarked that this legislation addresses Alaskans going elsewhere to carry, not vice versa. Number 1583 REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON moved to report CSSSHB 177(STA) out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSSHB 177(STA) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|